My Time with Save Our Public Shools

In Summer of 2016, I canvassed in Somerville, Medford, Cambridge and Winchester alongside teachers and parents from the Save Our Public Schools campaign. I was campaigning for State Senator Pat Jehlen as an intern for Planned Parenthood. As a transplant into a city I’d never lived in, I had a lot to learn in order to successfully talk to voters about issues that very rarely included reproductive justice. Though I had a general understanding of Question 2 regarding the charter cap, I certainly did not appreciate what the Save Our Public Schools Campaign was up against.

Fellow campaigners and me, about to door knock in Somerville Source: Picture is my own

This class and building this website taught me about the challenges of grassroots organizing and the power of Astroturf groups and philanthro-capitalists to control the narrative on issues. When you Google “School Choice,” the first site that comes up is the Friedman Foundation’s EdChoice website. It’s visually appealing, easy to navigate, rife with interactive resources, research, and educational animated videos. It’s accessible and it’s compelling. The site is in strong favor of the range of school choice options and funding mechanisms, yet the tone is insidious. There is no pro-con list, and the site doesn’t position school choice as an issue with multiple perspectives so much as a good thing that is being implemented in a range of ways throughout the country. There is no “fight, fight, fight” tone or mantra. They let school choice appear to be the natural answer.

The battle over choice is stacked against those who oppose it; on one side, there are market solutions supported by those who have had success in the market. Grassroots community organizations opposing school choice do not have the money to use EdChoice’s tactics. If I’d understood this in 2016, I would have been far more skeptical about “no on 2” campaigns.  Yet organizers educated and knocked on doors. They spoke to voters and got them to the polls.

New Criticism of Philanthro-capitalism

Bill and Melinda Gates Source: www.gatesfoundation.org/~/media/GFO/Who-We-Are/cochairs_LeeHighSchool_296x310.jpg?la=en

I didn’t have an understanding of philanthro-capitalism, let alone a word for it. And I bought in. Freshman year, I applied for an internship with the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. The enormous funds that Bill Gates, Warren Buffet and Mark Zuckerberg give put towards charitable causes is not inherently bad, but I didn’t examine the way in which leveraging that much money for a cause, particularly for their own philanthropic organizations, enables such top down control of the issue (Cassidy, 2015). Moreover, in a phenomenon that mirrors the school choice debate, I didn’t realize how these organizations actually massively reduce tax revenue that could otherwise go to public goods like schools and improving infrastructure. When philanthro-capitalists put money aside for charitable causes, they avoid paying the capital gains tax they would if they cashed in their stock (Cassidy, 2015). Dollars passed to descendants would also generate estate tax upon death, so charitable donation, which are usually made in the form of stock, enables these billionaires to avoid huge taxes (Cassidy, 2015).

This is an issue of control. Tax dollars could be used for government programs out of the control of philanthro-capitalists, or philanthro-capitalists could control the dollars with the added benefit of making capitalism seem defensible and these billionaires benevolent. This constitutes an erasure of the way capitalism has generated the structures that have disproportionately oppressed some of the same communities the philanthro-capitalists claim to help through their efforts.

Importance of Education

Specifically, in the context of organizing, education is vital to understanding and addressing problems. As Alinsky (1989) points to the importance of looking at an overall situation and picking particular challenges upon which action can be taken. This only works if we understand the complex dynamics that undergird the problems. This is especially true in a world of philanthro-capitalism where the most appealing sources of information about problems or issues may come from these enormous foundations who fund research and flashy websites. These websites are not reflexive; they don’t self-identify their positionality or address their end goals.

Staying “woke” is an overused term, but philanthro-capitalists bring new challenges to staying “woke.” Community organizers have to overcome the challenge that benevolent appearing capitalist can create compelling top-down solutions, and they have the platform to convince the public as well as the government that their solutions are best.

If there is one thing to be taken away from the Boston organizers who staunchly support equitable funding of traditional public schools, it is that community organizers are capable of success even when up against several-million-dollar campaigns.